28 U.S.C. § 1411
Jury trials
Section effective
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 146
cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1984–2025 · leading case: Granfinanciera, S.A. v. Nordberg, 492 U.S. 33 (1989).
Granfinanciera, S.A. v. Nordberg, 492 U.S. 33 (1989). “V) contains no mention of a right to a jury trial, and 28 U. S. C. § 1411 (1982 ed., Supp. V) "affords jury trials only in personal injury or wrongful death suits.”
In Re G-I Holdings, Inc., 323 B.R. 583 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2005). “§ 157 (b)(5), and 28 U.S.C. § 1411 (a) ] that jury trials are not required for personal injury claims at the claims allowance stage”).”
In re W.R. Grace & Co., 475 B.R. 34 (D. Del. 2012). “However, if a claimant elects to proceed to jury trial, his potential recovery under the Joint Plan is limited to the lesser of the amount of the jury verdict or the Maximum Value established by the TDP.”
Jacobs v. O'Bannon (In Re O'Bannon), 49 B.R. 763 (Bankr. M.D. La. 1985). “12 *768 The Bankruptcy Amendments and Federal Judgeship Act’s replacement for § 1480 is § 1411; it provides as follows: “28 U.S.C. § 1411. Jury Trials. “(a) Except as provided in sub-section (b) of this section, this chapter and title 11 do not affect any right to trial by jury…”
Jefferson Nat'l Bank v. I.A. Durbin, Inc. (In Re I.A. Durbin, Inc.), 62 B.R. 139 (S.D. Fla. 1986). “On February 20, 1985, Kail and Durbin’s demand for a jury trial was denied by the bankruptcy court based on 28 U.S.C. § 1411 . They are appealing this ruling.”
Murray v. Richmond Steel & Welding Co. (In Re Hudson), 170 B.R. 868 (E.D.N.C. 1994). “The new statutes provided in part in 28 U.S.C. § 1411 : “(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, this chapter and title 11 do not affect any right to trial by jury, in a case under title 11 or in a proceeding arising under title 11 or arising in or related to a…”
Hughes-Bechtol, Inc. v. Air Enter., Inc. (In Re Hughes-Bechtol, Inc.), 107 B.R. 552 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 1989). “As the Supreme Court stated, We do not decide today whether the current jury trial provision — 28 U.S.C. § 1411 (1982 ed., Supp. IV) — permits bankruptcy courts to conduct jury trials in fraudulent conveyance actions like the one respondent initiated.”
RSM Richter Inc. v. Aguilar (In Re Ephedra Prods. Liab. Litig.), 349 B.R. 333 (S.D.N.Y. 2006). “Although none of the objectors relied on, or even cited, 28 U.S.C. § 1411 -which provides that, except in the case of involuntary bankruptcies, "this chapter and title 11 do not affect any right to trial by jury that an individual has under applicable nonbankruptcy law with…”
In the Matter of Grabill Corp., Camdon Companies, Inc., Foxxford Grp. Ltd., Debtors. Appeal of Ncnb Nat'l Bank of North Carolina, 967 F.2d 1152 (7th Cir. 1992). “BAFJA’s only provision related to jury trials, 28 U.S.C. § 1411 , preserves this right for personal injury and wrongful death actions.”
In Re Wr Grace & Co., 468 B.R. 81 (D. Del. 2012). “However, if a claimant elects to proceed to jury trial, his potential recovery under the Joint Plan is limited to the lesser of the amount of the jury verdict or the Maximum Value established by the TDP. The Libby Claimants allege that this "lesser-of" limitation on their…”
Leathem v. Von Volkmar (In Re Von Volkmar), 217 B.R. 561 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1998). “Consequently, in light of the limited subject matter jurisdiction of the Court, this opinion need not further extensively discuss the parties’ dispute over Plaintiffs claimed right to trial by jury and any related Seventh Amendment implications or application of 28 U.”
Stranz v. Ice Cream Liquidation, Inc. (In Re Ice Cream Liquidation, Inc.), 281 B.R. 154 (Bankr. D. Conn. 2002). “The term "personal injury tort claim" also appears in 28 U.S.C. § 1411 (a) which provides as follows: Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, this chapter and title 11 do not affect any right to trial by jury that an individual has under applicable nonbank-ruptcy…”
— 28 U.S.C. § 1411(a) — 1 case
Boyer v. Balanoff (In Re Boyer), 93 B.R. 313 (Bankr. N.D.N.Y. 1988).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.